The Canberra Ratepayers Association has been angered by the refusal of the Chief Minister, Rosemary Follett, to cap rates to the CPI and to move to a user-pays system.
The convener of the association, Peter Blackshaw, said yesterday that residential rates had gone up 20 per cent in the past year. He said that at a meeting with Ms Follett last week she had showed no sympathy for inner-city residents who had been forced out by high rates.
However, Ms Follett rejected the suggestion, saying the Government had provided help in hardship cases.
Mr Blackshaw said NSW Shires and Municipal Councils had pegged rates to the consumer price index and the ACT should be able to do the same. He said there should be a review of the rate-assessment process towards user pays _ presently, rates on inner Canberra homes were up to 20 times higher than rates in the newer suburbs, despite all receiving similar garbage, roads and other services.
If Kerry Packer’s Sydney house was levied under ACT principles he would have to pay $98,000 a year in rates.
On rate-capping, and in spite of many ratepayers suffering increases of nearly 100 per cent since self-government, Ms Follett “”flatly rejected any review”. She had also rejected a user-pay system.
Ms Follett said yesterday that a user-pays system would help ratepayers in the higher valued areas of Canberra at the expense of people in lower valued areas. Rates were to provide services to all Canberrans and only met 50 per cent of the municipal budget.
Mr Blackshaw said some people in inner areas lived for 30 years or so in modest houses on large blocks which when totalled did not amount to a high value, but they were stung by the rate based on the unimproved value. Many of these people were on fixed or low incomes and could not afford the rises.
He suggested further that the new Territory Plan would make things worse because the large blocks in some inner areas were attracting high prices as potential redevelopment sites. These high prices were then reflected in valuations for the whole area so nearby homeowners unable or unwilling to sell for re-development will be slugged by a massive rate increases.
He said residential rate-payers had been hit far higher than the overall rate revenue increase of 5 per cent because commercial property values and therefore rates had fallen. He thought the average increase in residential rates was closer to 20 per cent.
Last year’s Budget papers confirm what Mr Blackshaw said. They said, “”The 1992-93 rating assessment led to an average increase of five per cent in general rates revenue. As a result of the annual revaluation, the overall unimproved value of land for rating purposes increased by 18.44 per cent, from $6.2 billion to $7.4 billion. Rate revenue from residential properties increased by about 26 per cent as a result of increasing land values and an increase in the number of rateable properties, while the value of, and revenue from, commercial properties declined by about 5%.”
Mr Blackshaw acknowledged Ms Follett had agreed to review the 20 per cent penalty interest on late rates payments which he described as usurious. He called for it to be the same as the bank rate, as in NSW.
Last Budget the Government cut the bonus for early payment from 5 per cent to 4 per cent citing lower interest rates, but kept the penalty at the same rate.
He said Ms Follett had agreed also to review the deferral-of-rates provisions in hardships cases which he said few people knew about the present deferral system and even fewer would be poor enough to qualify for it. Ms Follett pointed out that details about rates deferral and rebates was contained in every rates notice. Each rates notice clearly pointed out where help could be obtained.